Apple Says App Store 'Welcomes Competition' Following Criticism From Spotify and Others

[Zwhaler]

They chose the example of an app currently suing Apple for unfair competition as an example of their competition?

I normally don't defend Apple but what's wrong with this? Apple didn't even have to do what they did here at all.

What bothers me about the recent Supreme Court news is that people are treating the App Store like it some sort of public utility or government entity for the public good. It's Apple's private property that they created. They just happened to be massively successful and millions of people have come to rely on it. Just because Apple's gamble paid off doesn't mean that Apple isn't entitled to the resulting advantage. Yes, it can be abused, but no, you don't have to use it! If you don't like it don't use it. And yes, bigger companies are getting bigger. What else do you expect?

I have been using Android for years, and while Google's data exploitation practices are through the roof compared to Apple's, you don't see me pointing the finger at Apple for being a monopoly in this case. You don't have to use the App Store! It is a luxury and you agree to the terms. People act like they have to use it or that it is a constant in this society. Sure, it may seem that way, and developed society has adjusted to it, but that doesn't mean that Apple has to relinquish their advantage and treat their App Store like it's some sort of public service. And no, it's not a monopoly!

 

[apolloa]

Oh dear, pathetic desperate move by Apple, it won’t stop the investigations though... and I’m glad they are being investigated.

This website is nothing more then the usual typical Apple fluffy white wondrous cloud, offering sweeties and goodness to its customers, which in turn are designed to hide its hardcore aggressive business practices that are maximising it’s profits and penalising it’s competitors...

 

[rgbrock1]

If Spotify whines about Apple's anti-competitive behavior then why is it that when visiting Spotify's website they don't offer alternatives to their music streaming service like, Deezer, Apple Music, etc.?

 

[MauiPa]

If they truly care about competition, then they would allow Developer-ID signed apps on iOS. They have the technology in place to make that happen.

What they really want is the 30% cut (15% if subscription over 1 year) on everything released on iOS. As long as competition is happening under those terms, they are Ok with it.

Whether that is anti-competitive is for the courts to eventually decide on. From here it seems like Apple's side so far is pretty disingenuous, by ignoring the fact that they could allow Developer ID signed apps and still retain the safety aspect of the platform.

You know this is mostly BS? Very disingenuous. These are the same rates charged by Google Play, and developers like Spotify have the ability to deliver apps and services without paying Apple, just by not signing up through App Store itself. So developers have a way of delivering Apps for free, and signing up customers for their revenue model for free, while using the app store. Genious!

Most developers are not large multinational companies, but small independents which the Apple Store represents a realistic way of marketing and delivering their product.

One one hand they get slammed for trying to ensure integrity and privacy, and on the other hand they get slammed by not being autocratic enough. But apps not playing by the privacy rules can be immediately shut down. Yay! There are enough sleazy FBs and others out their stealing and selling your data, we don't need more.

The success of the platform and the low level of bad behavior versus Android is enough proof of concept and proof of success.

You are right on one thing, courts will decide.

 

[rgbrock1]

Spotify moans about Apple taking a cut of their fees, meanwhile Spotify takes a cut of artist's royalties.

And it is a fact that Spotify pays less in artist royalties than Apple does. I guess that doesn't matter to the folks here who whine about Apple's practices.

 

[apolloa]

If Spotify whines about Apple's anti-competitive behavior then why is it that when visiting Spotify's website they don't offer alternatives to their music streaming service like, Deezer, Apple Music, etc.?

And it is a fact that Spotify pays less in artist royalties than Apple does. I guess that doesn't matter to the folks here who whine about Apple's practices.

And I can throw the argument back, likewise why does the artist not just use another streaming service other then Spotify eh? Instead of winging about how little they get laid from it, I mean it must be easy to do right??....

See how that doesn’t work? Same with the App Store..

 

[realtuner]

250GB/day download bandwidth from Dropbox for $9.99/month.

As I said, if you think they're going to give you that much bandwidth (and guarantee service and not throttle your service) for $10 a month you're dreaming.

But hey, go ahead and try and prove us all wrong.

 

[mcalict]

Overall I'm glad the App Store exists. I realize there are both positives and negatives. On another note, I wonder if Apple could lower their cut. Or even better, if sanity could prevail, and society would see the value in paying a reasonable amount for software. How we've raced to the bottom where everything is free or $0.99... I find it ironic everyone wants a well paying job with benefits but no-one wants to pay for anything anymore (and have zero appreciation/care for what it takes to produce anything). How do developers afford to eat, let alone live?

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

If they leave the app store, i wont be using it any more. I am not going to maintain updates and find software elsewhere, the 90's was a horrible time and i don't want to re-live it.

Yeah, the 90s may have been horrible for this, but these days, any good app distributed outside a store (see Mac, Windows, Linux) will automatically download updates for itself. See for example:
- Firefox and Chrome
- Steam
- Spotify
- IntelliJ and Unity
- etc, etc

 

[MacDanF]

Anyone remember the antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft ? They created and owned Windows but since it was so big they had to behave like it was a public utility of some sort. Same things apply to iOS i guess.

I don't understand what's the debate about the question if they are anti-competitive or not. In their store policies they state an App can be rejected for business reasons and they have used that clause on occasions. How more black and white an admission can it be ?

 

[Cosmosent]

RE: "We created the App Store with two goals in mind: that it be a safe and trusted place for customers to discover and download apps, and a great business opportunity for all developers."

I call BS on AAPL's statement, & personally believe AAPL failed catastrophically on both goals !


1.) It's a "curated" App Store, where AAPL has a Complete & Total Stranglehold on App Discovery ... I give them a F-- on their "Discovery" goal !

2.) Regarding business opportunity, it's fairly common knowledge that game revenue accounts for 85% of ALL revenue in "the store," with the remaining 15% going to streaming media content "sub" apps (10%), & everything else (the remaining 5%).


The simple fact of the matter is AAPL paid little to NO attention to the App Store, until they began to see a Decline in iPhone Sales, & started to really start worrying about competition & a lack of iPhone upgrades.

The App Store was broken before Phil Schiller took it over ... he broke it even further !

IMO, it can't be fixed !

A 2nd, brand-new App Store is needed ... one for Adults & ALL others who are interested in Raising the Educational Bar.

One that requires a one-time-fee of $299 to place an app, so that it's NOT filled with a bunch of Crap Apps like the existing App Store.

BTW, many of us App Devs refer to the App Store as "the Crap Store" !

The main problem with AAPL is that Tim Cook & Phil Schiller make too many of the key decisions.

Cook is a Bean Counter with a skill in Hardware Manufacturing Operations, & Schiller's last major contribution to AAPL was the Trackwheel for the iPod (recommend you look up the date on that one !).

 

[smulji]

I guess Apple would point to Walmart or Target that have their own brands they sell. Except usually those brands are of a cheaper quality and price than name brands.

on other platforms with App Stores (Windows & Android), if a developer has the capacity to host their own app and implement their own payment mechanism, they pay 0% and they're allowed to process the payment within the App. I think that's fair.

 

[MacDanF]

I think the store is great and i don't care at all how much they charge and how the money gets distributed. I would just like an other place where i could download the apps i want that Apple does not allow, not because they are buggy or shady but because they do not fit with Apple's business model. That include just about any Apps for software developer among other things.

 

[ipponrg]

And it is a fact that Spotify pays less in artist royalties than Apple does. I guess that doesn't matter to the folks here who whine about Apple's practices.

If you're an artist and rely on royalties from Apple Music / Pandora / Spotify / etc as your main source of income, you might want to reconsider your career

 

[840quadra]

Oh dear, pathetic desperate move by Apple, it won’t stop the investigations though... and I’m glad they are being investigated.

This website is nothing more then the usual typical Apple fluffy white wondrous cloud, offering sweeties and goodness to its customers, which in turn are designed to hide its hardcore aggressive business practices that are maximising it’s profits and penalising it’s competitors...

How is this different than how Facebook, Amazon, or Google do business?

For example. My Pixel 3 came preloaded with google applications and when I go to their store, the suggestions are quite google centric.

 

[MacLoveMacHate]

Competition is where Apple gets some of its best ideas

 

[pika2000]

Many app developers invested in time and equipment after signing up for the rules only to find them drastically changed a few months later. The goalposts change every few months with no warning. Apple are judge and jury. An app they love one month might be tagged for removal a year later. If you've invested in an app and that happens then it is game over.

It’s always a risk to put your eggs on somebody else’s nest.

Netlfix, Amazon, figured out a way to bypass Apple’s fees. Yet Spotify couldn’t? Puhlease
[doublepost=1559149969][/doublepost]

How is this different than how Facebook, Amazon, or Google do business?

For example. My Pixel 3 came preloaded with google applications and when I go to their store, the suggestions are quite google centric.

Because Google is God and Apple is evil. Period. At least that’s the mentality of many people.
[doublepost=1559150116][/doublepost]

Anyone remember the antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft ? They created and owned Windows but since it was so big they had to behave like it was a public utility of some sort. Same things apply to iOS i guess.

I don't understand what's the debate about the question if they are anti-competitive or not. In their store policies they state an App can be rejected for business reasons and they have used that clause on occasions. How more black and white an admission can it be ?

But iOS doesn’t hold the majority of smartphone market. The Microsoft equivalent in the mobile space is Android.

 

[rjp1]

Apple didn’t like paying a small percentage on every iPhone to Qualcomm. They were able to switch to Intel. They decided it was worth paying the fee to Qualcomm and are switching back.

App developers don’t like paying an enormous percentage on every app sale to Apple. Let them start their own App Store. If they decide it is worth paying the 30% fee then they will switch back.

Imagine Apple’s reaction if Qualcomm wanted 30%.

As consumers we deserve the right to install whatever software on our computers that we want. We bought the phone and we should be the one that controls what app stores and apps we want to put on it.

 

[barmann]

"Apple Says App Store 'Welcomes Competition' Following Criticism From Spotify and Others" ...
Isn't that what every monopolistic company says? The app store should be independent of Apple now that they are competing in it with their own apps.

Well said .

No company will ever welcome competition .
It's the only thing worse than taxes .

Taxes not being an issue for Apple - for now - stiffling competition will remain to be one of their main goals .

 

[Classie]

The only benefit that would come from “dismantling” the App Store is for the bigger companies, such as Spotify, who will earn more money.
For the consumer it will mean less protection and worse user experience.

Do people realize what an amazing job Apple is doing - and that they created the entire business and platform!?

There are ways around the subscription fee. Direct the user to your website through mail and explain why.

 

[BootsWalking]

As I said, if you think they're going to give you that much bandwidth (and guarantee service and not throttle your service) for $10 a month you're dreaming.

But hey, go ahead and try and prove us all wrong.

I disproved your argument about bandwidth cost and your response is simply to say they wouldn't provide the bandwidth they're contractually agreeing to. Not very persuasive, sorry.

 

[alex2792]

Nice try Tim, but none of the third party alternative browsers, mail clients, calendar, camera etc. apps actually complete with Apple because I CANT SET DEFAULT APPS.

 

[jtauke]

I disproved your argument about bandwidth cost and your response is simply to say they wouldn't provide the bandwidth they're contractually agreeing to. Not very persuasive, sorry.

Disproven him? Hardly.

lol.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Yes, but to further complicate matters, the developer can't send the user to the site within the app to subscribe.

That's true per Apple rules. No linking to an outside website.

But... if a person is serious about joining Spotify... they could surely find their way to Spotify.com, right?

Personally... I always sign up for services directly on the vendor's website. I want to go directly to the source.

My Netflix account is through Netflix.com. If I had Spotify... it would be through Spotify.com. It's better to have a relationship directly with the vendor rather than though someone else.

Question: If you signed up for Spotify though Apple... what happens if you decide to get an Android phone? Do you have to cancel your account through Apple... and then sign up for another account through Spotify? I'm not sure how that works exactly.

It would be weird to keep going to Apple to manage your Spotify account when you don't use Apple products anymore... if that's how it works.

But like I said... I'd rather sign up directly through Spotify itself and use my login on my iPhone, Android phone, PC, whatever.

Yes... you can't get to Spotify.com from a link in the iOS app. But gosh... finding the website for the largest streaming music service on Earth can't be that difficult. It's actually better to go to their website anyway.

 

[smulji]

The only benefit that would come from “dismantling” the App Store is for the bigger companies, such as Spotify, who will earn more money.
For the consumer it will mean less protection and worse user experience.

Do people realize what an amazing job Apple is doing - and that they created the entire business and platform!?

There are ways around the subscription fee. Direct the user to your website through mail and explain why.

There's no need to dismantle the App Store. With respect to subscription-based services, on other platforms with App Stores (Windows & Android), if a developer has the capacity to host their own app and implement their own payment mechanism, they pay 0% and they're allowed to process the subscription (creating a new account) & payment within the App. Otherwise, they pay a 10% or 15% right from day one, not after a year. If Apple implements this, that would help its case.